Talk:Char siu

Linguistic Clarification Needed

Hello, and sorry to have to ask (I have tried a net search, with less useful results than Iki might hopefully furnish), but could someone clarify the exact terms used here: though I see there has been some disagreement over the term, the current page definition gives "literally fork-roasted" - does this mean one of the two sounds refers to a fork, and the other the act of roasting, or the two words communicate cooking in this way? I see someone here has suggested the term "barbecue" rather than roast. Thanks for any help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.187.9.79 (talk) 14:26, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 19 September 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Consensus to not move, therefore, not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Dreamy Jazz 🎷 ^{talk to me | my contributions} 21:32, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

---

Char siu → Cha siuCha siu – queried move request. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:21, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

---

• Request copied from Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests:-
  • "Cha siu" is the name referred to in the article, while the term "Char siu" is not used. It is also the Cantonese Yale romanisation, while the word "char" is not used in any romanisations. | sig = 17jiangz1 (talk) 15:26, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

---

• @17jiangz1 and Imaginatorium: Continued discussion: Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:24, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose "Char siu" seems to be the WP:COMMONNAME, at least as far as google search results go (1,350,000 results for "Char siu" vs 229,000 for "Cha siu"). Bennv3771 (talk) 04:42, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:UE: Established systematic transliterations, such as Hanyu Pinyin, are preferred. However, if there is a common English-language form of the name, then use it, even if it is unsystematic. Yale Romanization is not very "established" (neither it nor Jyutping nor Guangdong Romanization appear outside of textbooks and dictionaries), and anyway the current title is 5x more common in WP:RS than any of the alternatives . 59.149.124.29 (talk) 02:56, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. The romanization "Char siu" seems to have been in common use since at least 1936, when it was included in the book Chinatown Inside Out. 17jiangz1 has a point when he/she mentions that the word would no longer be romanized this way according to current rules, but the old spelling is well established in literature and now appears to be the default. "Cha siu" is also used in literature (the oldest reference I could find was from The Single Girl Goes to Town (1968)), but "Char siu" seems to preponderate according to my search on Google Books (1, 2). See also this mention from the Encyclopedia of Food and Health (2015) and this one from the World Food encyclopedia (2016), both of which use the Char siu romanization. dragfyre_ʞןɐʇc 03:55, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
• There was likely never an 'r' sound pronounced there :: the "ar" is likeliest a British English phonetic arhotic spelling of an 'ā' sound, same as Romany language nāk = "nose" becoming English "nark" (= "informant"). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:56, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

  Yes, Cantonese only has vowels or stops at the end of syllables not approximants, and doesn't have an /r/ sound at all (see Cantonese phonology). So the <r> spelling is purely an English thing, whether due to arhotic spelling or folk etymology (wikt:char#Etymology 1) or whatever. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 00:59, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

• Comment I agree with the oppose !votes, but should the article text also be changed to "char siu"? It seems strange that the article is titled a certain way while the article text uses a different romanization. Natg 19 (talk) 00:50, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Pronunciation

The most recent edit changed the pronunciation to "char shoo," a pronunciation that I've never heard and can't find online. Before I revert, I wanted to see if others have views. Wobblygriswold (talk) 07:04, 2 November 2025 (UTC) Wobblygriswold (talk) 07:04, 2 November 2025 (UTC)

Very late but thanks for reverting it. Felinaex ^{(purr / pawprints)} 14:39, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

2026.05 Edit Notes

Summary of changes:

• expanded ingredients/preparation section
• added history section
• added in culture section

Specific outstanding issues

• expansion of lede to better reflect body
• needs a source for the Flanders/Holland statement

General outstanding issues

• general copyediting
• needs sources in the Southeast Asian cuisine section

Borscht is a Featured Article in a similar topic and can be referenced for ideal formatting/layout/content. The good article criteria may also be helpful for editing. If any of the issues are addressed, I would be very grateful. Felinaex ^{(purr / pawprints)} 14:50, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

Hi Felinaex, this is an interesting article you have taken on and thankyou very much for your work so far. I have removed the statement "Mentions of char siu have appeared in royal recipes books from the Zhou dynasty over three thousand years ago." for now -- a style magazine isn't really a reliable source for historical research, and no royal cookbooks existed in China 3000 years ago (see List of sources of Chinese culinary history). All culinary texts (not royal cookbooks) from the Zhou-era date to the late period. Whonting (talk) 10:29, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for looking over the article, appreciate you amending it! SCMP, the publisher of the magazine, is considered a WP:GREL and is the English-language newspaper of record in Hong Kong, but you're correct that a historical claim should rely on more academic sources. Will be off to hunt for some, thanks again. Felinaex ^{(purr / pawprints)} 17:45, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

SCMP should definitely be reliable for reporting on contemporary cultural practice, but I have found that newspapers and magazines rarely do a good job with history. I've had a quick look and it appears Fuchsia Dunlop has something of a history in Invitation to a Feast even though it's still very popular rather than scholarly. One route to researching may be to find the most reputable Chinese etymology dictionaries to see what they say. Whonting (talk) 22:05, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the tip, I actually just added her book as a source to the article today! Just borrowed it from the library but haven't read through it completely yet. Hopefully the book will provide more academic leads as well. Felinaex ^{(purr / pawprints)} 22:14, 2 June 2026 (UTC)